UK British News Megathread - aka CWCissey's news thread

https://news.sky.com/story/row-over-new-greggs-vegan-sausage-rolls-heats-up-11597679

A heated row has broken out over a move by Britain's largest bakery chain to launch a vegan sausage roll.

The pastry, which is filled with a meat substitute and encased in 96 pastry layers, is available in 950 Greggs stores across the country.

It was promised after 20,000 people signed a petition calling for the snack to be launched to accommodate plant-based diet eaters.


But the vegan sausage roll's launch has been greeted by a mixed reaction: Some consumers welcomed it, while others voiced their objections.

View image on Twitter


spread happiness@p4leandp1nk
https://twitter.com/p4leandp1nk/status/1080767496569974785

#VEGANsausageroll thanks Greggs

7
10:07 AM - Jan 3, 2019

See spread happiness's other Tweets

Twitter Ads info and privacy


Cook and food poverty campaigner Jack Monroe declared she was "frantically googling to see what time my nearest opens tomorrow morning because I will be outside".

While TV writer Brydie Lee-Kennedy called herself "very pro the Greggs vegan sausage roll because anything that wrenches veganism back from the 'clean eating' wellness folk is a good thing".

One Twitter user wrote that finding vegan sausage rolls missing from a store in Corby had "ruined my morning".

Another said: "My son is allergic to dairy products which means I can't really go to Greggs when he's with me. Now I can. Thank you vegans."

View image on Twitter


pg often@pgofton
https://twitter.com/pgofton/status/1080772793774624768

The hype got me like #Greggs #Veganuary


42
10:28 AM - Jan 3, 2019

See pg often's other Tweets

Twitter Ads info and privacy


TV presenter Piers Morgan led the charge of those outraged by the new roll.

"Nobody was waiting for a vegan bloody sausage, you PC-ravaged clowns," he wrote on Twitter.

Mr Morgan later complained at receiving "howling abuse from vegans", adding: "I get it, you're all hangry. I would be too if I only ate plants and gruel."

Another Twitter user said: "I really struggle to believe that 20,000 vegans are that desperate to eat in a Greggs."

"You don't paint a mustach (sic) on the Mona Lisa and you don't mess with the perfect sausage roll," one quipped.

Journalist Nooruddean Choudry suggested Greggs introduce a halal steak bake to "crank the fume levels right up to 11".

The bakery chain told concerned customers that "change is good" and that there would "always be a classic sausage roll".

It comes on the same day McDonald's launched its first vegetarian "Happy Meal", designed for children.

The new dish comes with a "veggie wrap", instead of the usual chicken or beef option.

It should be noted that Piers Morgan and Greggs share the same PR firm, so I'm thinking this is some serious faux outrage and South Park KKK gambiting here.

 

[the printer is outo fink]

So who tells the migrants about "opportunities" in developed nations?

There are NGOs in 'developing' countries specifically to encourage migration into the west. They've been complaining a lot in recent months about losing funding due to USAID being slashed.

 

[>IMPLYING]

Why this particular porn? It hasn't damaged as many people as gay porn has. So what gives?

"Muh violence against women."
The same motive for banning face sitting porn and the like. Anything that can be perceived as sexually violent gets banned. Since the kayfabe is on "protecting young girls", they just chucked another sort of porn on the block.

 

[Long and sneaky]

"Muh violence against women."
The same motive for banning face sitting porn and the like. Anything that can be perceived as sexually violent gets banned. Since the kayfabe is on "protecting young girls", they just chucked another sort of porn on the block.

Censorship of anything they can because they want to feel powerful and porn is easier to go after.
They'll ban anything to 'protect young girls' except the grooming gangs.

 

[bort420]

So who tells the migrants about "opportunities" in developed nations?

The NHS recruits in foreign developing countries directly

 

[ToroidalBoat]

They've been complaining a lot in recent months about losing funding due to USAID being slashed.

That's good.

I wonder what kind of "sales pitch" they use?

And as @Whoopsie Daisy said, I imagine there's word of mouth: infiltrators do "sales pitch" to some potential migrants, who in turn tell others. Then word and rumors spread.

 

[FedPostalService]

Why this particular porn? It hasn't damaged as many people as gay porn has. So what gives?

A moral panic by third wave feminists in their 20’s who seem to only have one night stands with the worst type of men possible because they remind them of their dads and think all men like to choke women.

I don’t like choking porn but since two consenting adults can choke the fuck out of each other whilst they’re banging I see banning this as retarded. Plus everyone watching porn used a VPN now so this is useless.

 

[ToroidalBoat]

Why this particular porn? It hasn't damaged as many people as gay porn has. So what gives?

"Straight sex bad, gay sex good!"?



(Maybe they aren't getting to outright banning all straight porn yet, but they're banning the more extreme kinds first?)

 

[Whoopsie Daisy]

A moral panic by third wave feminists in their 20’s who seem to only have one night stands with the worst type of men possible because they remind them of their dads and think all men like to choke women.

These are the most damaging women for society, doubly so for other women. They make terrible choices, then rant at other women for making better choices.

I don’t like choking porn but since two consenting adults can choke the fuck out of each other whilst they’re banging I see banning this as retarded. Plus everyone watching porn used a VPN now so this is useless.

Two adults consent, isn't there someone you forgot to ask?

 

[emptypacketofmethadone]

It is

Every woman I know would flip out if a bloke tried to strangle them during sex, it's not normal

Why do women have to 'choose better'? Why can't men just be better? A lot of men pretend to be upstanding people and then turn out to be felons, rapists, pedos, violent. Not all shitty men have grills, face tats and dreadlocks to warn potential victims.

The more logical solution is just for men to not be cruel rather than expecting women to be mindreaders and anticipate which men are cruel.

These are the most damaging women for society, doubly so for other women. They make terrible choices, then rant at other women for making better choices.


Two adults consent, isn't there someone you forgot to ask?

 

[teriyakiburns]

The more logical solution is just for men to not be cruel rather than expecting women to be mindreaders and anticipate which men are cruel.

Most men are not, but the unfortunate reality is that some men simply are, the same way some dogs are violent retards and some apples are half rotten. They're all usually easy to spot, though. It just requires a little discretion. No mind reading needed.

 

[Clem Fandango]

expecting women to be mindreaders

There's only one sex that expects the other to be mindreaders, and it ain't men.

 

[Overly Serious]

The more logical solution is just for men to not be cruel rather than expecting women to be mindreaders and anticipate which men are cruel.

I shouldn't wade into this as I don't really want to join the "Men Should Strangle Women" party by some sort of default, but the logical flaw in the above is that it treats men as a block. No matter how good I am, it wont make the next man also good. And given the set of Men is always going to be a mix of good and bad (mostly good, I hope), the only viable solution is to be able to distinguish between the good and bad ones. And regrettably I have known a number of women in my life who could not distinguish between strong and cruel.

Saying that actually brings to mind a personal case from my early 20's when a girl I was somewhat acquainted with fell for another guy because she saw him as strong/tough/something, I don't know. The reason it comes to mind is that he and I ended up having a little bit of a set-to and I dealt with him rather handily which I honestly pretty much expected as to me he seemed rather weak and unpleasant. But - and this is the point - she was shocked. She genuinely seemed to just fall for his loud and aggressive schtick which was bizarre to me. He was clearly just an arsehole with an inflated ego. I think a lot of women for whatever reason, genuinely cannot tell when someone is just being petty and nasty to people weaker than themselves, rather than actually strong and confident. I don't fully know why.

 

[FedPostalService]

Why do women have to 'choose better'? Why can't men just be better? A lot of men pretend to be upstanding people and then turn out to be felons, rapists, pedos, violent. Not all shitty men have grills, face tats and dreadlocks to warn potential victims.

The more logical solution is just for men to not be cruel rather than expecting women to be mindreaders and anticipate which men are cruel.

Go back to the Beauty Parlour, cat-lady.

 

[emptypacketofmethadone]

Go back to the Beauty Parlour, cat-lady.

No.

Wholeheartedly disagree. There are instances of very introverted men, doctors, pastors, lawyers, judges committing horrific acts of abuse. Chris Watts who murdered his entire family to run away with another broad was considered an upstanding citizen, and he's far from the only one. Domestic violence refuges in my country are full, how probable is it that all those women had received warning signs that the guy was trouble? Most domestic violence victims I have met were partnered with introverted, educated and well-spoken men with no reason to fear in the initial stages.

I would argue that if a woman starts a relationship with someone who is very obviously a wigger or who hails from a ghetto or dodgy upbringing would be unwise, but nonetheless it doesn't mean the man is justified in bringing her to any harm. That said, if I were female, I would certainly avoid men from certain backgrounds and cultures.

There is no legal loophole in my country that excuses the abuser of a battered woman if he presented with a 'tough guy' or 'thug' image and thus she 'should have seen it coming'. I have never even heard an argument made by any defence lawyer of an abuser in a court that his client should be precluded from accountability because of his image. Most women who enter into relationships with thugs are likely also from a Dickensian upbringing, which explains the pairing. Can you think of a white-collar, well-to-do man in a respectable profession seeking a woman from a slum?

Inversely, I have yet to hear of a male abuse victim being asked why he didn't 'choose better' (in a way that is not from women who are facetiously mocking the exact arguments made here) or why he was not somehow able to look into his crystal ball and prophetically predict that the woman he loved would turn on him. The idea of 'choosing better' , for either gender, is highly illogical: (but I suspect that you already know that in your heart of hearts and simply delight in the pain of women).

(Sincerely, a man with a cock and two fully functioning bollocks who has actually lives in the world and knows people who've been abused.)

 

[Otterly]

I think a lot of women for whatever reason, genuinely cannot tell when someone is just being petty and nasty to people weaker than themselves, rather than actually strong and confident. I don't fully know why.

Because we don’t fight physically any more. And… I will try to phrase this in a way that doesn’t blame women for men’s violent actions. It is always and only the fault of the violent parter if they are violent.
And … yes I have had several girlfriends who could not see what was in front of them. The one who insisted that she’d only date men with designer clothes and good grooming who was shocked when not one but two boyfriends turned out to be gay. Several who went for men they were told were bad news.
It isn’t restricted to women though, bad judgement. I know nobody has 20:20 foresight and we can all be caught out but I’m constantly surprised at how little insight some others have into their fellow man. ‘Don’t stick your dick in crazy’ being a cliche for a reason, men also do this, and they’re warned but she’s a looker or good in bed and boom, life ruined….
But it goes way beyond sexual partner choice. The new hire who to me screams insanity who everyone insists is wonderful and then yes, turns out to be insane. Tony fucking Blair -people acted like he was the second coming and you can just watch the man on tv for three minutes and see he’s a snake. People announce who they are constantly. The way they speak and act and react is all a huge tell. But a lot of people do not look. They can’t tell when they’re being lied to - I know some people are extremely convincing liars but most aren’t and it’s generally obvious if someone’s lying to you. The pedoface and AGP smirk are things that have really struck me since Ive been on here.
Some people are just not good at detecting very obvious cues. Again I’m not wanting to blame people for what happens because some people can be very convincing and it’s always and only the fault of the perpetrator, but the inability of the general public to detect a bad ‘un is weird
I’m convinced this is where the lizard people stuff comes from. Some people are so off putting and unpleasant they trigger this ‘run’ response and yet our ability to realise this is being trained out of us hard by the media and social engineering. You’re left with your primal instincts telling you this person will do very bad things and your higher brain telling you you’re a bigot if you even entertain the idea and the clash won’t resolve.
People need to listen to their gut more. It’s rarely wrong
@emptypacketofmethadone ive over the years had quite a few female colleagues get battered and hurt by male partners and the same line trotted out, nobody had a clue and yet when I’ve met the ‘upstanding’ husband at a work do I’ve thought he was horrid, and I am far from the only one who thought the same. When you actually talk to people who know them you’ll see behind that veneer, I’ve never encountered anyone who I genuinely thought was a lovely person who went on to do something really bad. I will freely admit I don’t think many people are lovely people. The number of people who can genuinely and consistently put on a perfect t facade and be monsters is low (thankfully.) almost all of them have impulse control issues that breach that surface regularly.

 

[ToroidalBoat]

Imagine having to live in the UK

Over 6 years later and I don't think things are improving there. Did the current trend of mass immigration really take off after 2019?

 

[teriyakiburns]

. There are instances of very introverted men, doctors, pastors, lawyers, judges committing horrific acts of abuse.

Yes, there are, which is why I said usually easy to spot. The problem here is that you're moving from a general demand (all men need to not be cruel), which was met with a general response that most men are not, to special pleading; some men are. Which I already agreed with. Some men are, and they're usually easy to spot. The existence of a harder-to-spot minority of a minority doesn't negate the fact that the vast majority are not cruel. And don't give me any of the bowl of M&Ms nonsense, if you're thinking about that shit. The exact same arguments apply to the minority of women who are willing and able to destroy the lives of every man they interact with, but we're not judging all women by that standard (woman hate thread doesn't count, because it's full of emotionally stunted manchilds).

Can you think of a white-collar, well-to-do man in a respectable profession seeking a woman from a slum?

I can think of two examples of this from my own life. One worked out; they have three kids and a nice home (though who knows, maybe she's secretly flattening his dick every monday). One very much didn't and left the man a pale shadow of who he used to be, after she was done isolating him from everyone he knew and tearing out his heart and soul.

Inversely, I have yet to hear of a male abuse victim being asked why he didn't 'choose better'

What do you think "don't stick your dick in crazy" means, if not a direct criticism of a man making a really bad decision on who to have a relationship with?

 

[emptypacketofmethadone]

@Otterly You don't necessarily know that the female colleagues hadn't been lovebombed or manipulated to see their abuser positively, though. Maybe everyone else in her life also regarded him positively.

Yes, there are, which is why I said usually easy to spot. The problem here is that you're moving from a general demand (all men need to not be cruel), which was met with a general response that most men are not, to special pleading; some men are. Which I already agreed with. Some men are, and they're usually easy to spot. The existence of a harder-to-spot minority of a minority doesn't negate the fact that the vast majority are not cruel. And don't give me any of the bowl of M&Ms nonsense, if you're thinking about that shit. The exact same arguments apply to the minority of women who are willing and able to destroy the lives of every man they interact with, but we're not judging all women by that standard (woman hate thread doesn't count, because it's full of emotionally stunted manchilds).


I can think of two examples of this from my own life. One worked out; they have three kids and a nice home (though who knows, maybe she's secretly flattening his dick every monday). One very much didn't and left the man a pale shadow of who he used to be, after she was done isolating him from everyone he knew and tearing out his heart and soul.


What do you think "don't stick your dick in crazy" means, if not a direct criticism of a man making a really bad decision on who to have a relationship with?

Sorry if I've wildly misinterpreted this but: sticking your dick = having sex. Not choosing a life partner.

 

[teriyakiburns]

Sorry if I've wildly misinterpreted this but: sticking your dick = having sex. Not choosing a life partner.

It means both.

 

[radicalradishranger]

Yet again a GoFundMe has been set up to get their bodies back to the UK.

Does no one buy travel insurance now?

I do but I go to gocompare, order by price and choose the cheapest package at £13. I don't read the terms and conditions but I don't think it would bring my body back if I died from being a drunken idiot in a hotel pool.